And someone needs to come up with a way to use higher speeds!!!!
Robert Bruninga wrote:
>>>>HamLists at ametx.com 12/29/04 7:08:54 AM >>>
>>>>>>>>>>APRS has prospered... Because I do not have to configure
>>(one configuration works almost universally (RELAY,WIDE...)
>>By simply addressing a message to the remote station (no path
>>settings required).
>>>>>>Agree completely but ONLY for 1 hop or so on a non-congested
>channel. Message exchange is a POINT-to-POINT process that
>requires acknowledgment and other than occassional one-liners is
>just grossly inefficient on an APRS system.
>>HAM communications needs a good point-to-point system for
>file and paragraph transfer, It is *impossible* to do this on APRS
>and APRS was not designed to do this. Thus we need
>CONNECTED mode connectivity on another channel to augment
>APRS.
>>Thus, why not a universal global NETgate system based
>on the very viable and transparent NetROM/TheNET system?
>Seems a slam-dunk to me...
>>>>>(Do we set up for I35, I30, I20, or I45 linking?
>>What about US75?
>>Hmmm. Decisions, Decisions, Decisions.)
>>>>>>The decision there is *very simple*. The new LINKn-N
>system was not designed for "linking", and cant possibly
>be used for linking because of simple basics of packet
>radio.
>>1) The decision is simple. If you are driving along I-35, then
>use 35LNKn-N.
>>2) Linking in this context is a multi-hop end-to-end system which
>everyone in packet knows cannot work beyond about 1 or 2
>hops even on a clear channel. (for end-to-end messaging (acks) etc)...
>>3) APRS was desiged for one-to-many on a shared channel.
>It was never designed and cannot possibly handle end-to-end
>point-to-point connected traffic (messages, even one liners on
>APRS are like "connected" traffic because of acks).
>>Thus there is only one "decision" and it is trivial:
>1) If you are sending brief info to everyone use APRS
>2) If you need to pass files or traffic or paragraphs
> to someone, then look on your APRS map or on your
> radio's front panel list for the call and freq of the nearby
> NETgate and connect to it, and then connect to
> anyone on the planet..
>3) I just cannot imagine anything simpler... (KISS)
>>Bob, WB4APR
>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Robert Bruninga
>>Posted At: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 9:27 PM
>>Subject: [aprssig] NetNodes, the future
>>>>The thing we really need is NetGates.
>>>>These are simply a TNC and a radio hooked to the internet but
>>they look to the RF user just like a TheNet or NetROM node.
>>Thus, they are a global level-4 AX.25 packet radio Network
>>that is independent of application and transparent to the
>>existing RF system.
>>>>About the only thing that has to be different is the node list.
>>It can't be 3500 nodes deep. The basic node list would have
>>to be organized around distance. If you ask for nodes, it
>>will give you a list of the 10 nearest. Other than that it
>>has connectivity to every node in the world. All you need to
>>know is its callsign.
>>>>That would be HAM radio at its finest. It wouldn't mater if
>>the node was in the next town by RF or the next state by the
>>internet. It appears like a NetROM or TheNET node with
>>one-hop connectiivty to the RF node. Which I suggest we call
>>a NetGate.
>>>>If I knew how to write the code, it would be sure fun to do..
>>>>de Wb4APR, Bob
>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>aprssig mailing list
>aprssig at lists.tapr.org>https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig>>_______________________________________________
>aprssig mailing list
>aprssig at lists.tapr.org>https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig>>>>-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.tapr.org/pipermail/aprssig/attachments/20041229/55b5663e/attachment.htm
-------------- next part --------------
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.298 / Virus Database: 265.6.6 - Release Date: 12/28/2004